Teaching philosophy of science to scientists: Why, what and how

European Journal for Philosophy of Science

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 115-134

  Grüne Yanoff, Till ^a,b  

^a ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b Finnish Centre of Excellence in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences   (Finland)

Author keywords

Methodology; Philosophy of science curriculum; Science education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893832937     PISSN: 18794912     EISSN: 18794920     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13194-013-0078-x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Allchin, D. (2001). Error types. Perspectives on Science, 9, 38-59.
2. Blachowicz, J. (2009). How science textbooks treat scientific method: a philosopher's perspective. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 60(2), 303-344.
3. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
4. Bird, A. (1998). Philosophy of science. London: Routledge.
5. Bortolotti, L. (2008). An introduction to the philosophy of science. Cambridge: Polity.
6. Cable, M. (2005). Calibration: A technician's guide. ISA.
7. Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called science? (3rd ed.). Brisbane: University of Queensland Press.
8. COPE. (2011). Code of conduct and best practice guidelines for journal editors. http://publicationethics.org/files/Code-of-conduct-for-journal-editors- Mar11.pdf. Accessed June 12th, 2013.
9. Curd, M., & Cover, J. A. (2012). Philosophy of science: The central issues (2nd ed.). New York: WW Norton.
10. Doran, P. (2006). Cold, hard facts. The New York Times. July 27, 2006.
11. Ennis, R. (1979). Research in philosophy of science bearing on science education. In P. Asquith & H. Kyburg (Eds.), Current research in philosophy of science (pp. 138-170). East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.
12. European Commission. (2008). The European Qualifications Framework for lifelong learning (EQF). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://ec.europa.eu/education/pub/pdf/general/eqf/broch- en.pdf. Accessed May 15th, 2013.
13. Grayson, D. J. (2006). Rethinking the content of physics courses. Physics Today, 59(2), 31.
14. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and reality: An introduction to the philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Hansson, S. O. (2012). Risk. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition). < http://plato.stanford. edu/archives/win2012/entries/risk/ >. Accessed June 15th, 2013.
16. Hertwig, R., & Ortmann, A. (2001). Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(3), 383-403.
17. Hillerbrand, R., & Ghil, M. (2008). Anthropogenic climate change: scientific uncertainties and moral dilemmas. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 237(14), 2132-2138.
18. Hodson, D. (1991). Philosophy of science and science education. In M. Matthews (Ed.), History, philosophy, and science teaching (pp. 19-32). Toronto, ON: OISE Press.
19. Hoover, K. D., & Perez, S. J. (2000). Three attitudes towards data mining. Journal of Economic Methodology, 7(2), 195-210.
20. IPCC. (2007). Summary for policymakers. In S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, & H. L. Miller (Eds.), Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Limited.
22. Kitcher, P. (2003). Science, truth and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Ladyman, J. (2002). Understanding philosophy of science. London: Routledge.
24. Lehtinen, A., & Kuorikoski, J. (2007). Computing the perfect model: why do economists shun simulation? Philosophy of Science, 74, 304-329.
25. Macrina, F. L. (2005). Scientific integrity. Washington, DC: ASM Press.
26. Martin, M. (1976). The relevance of philosophy of science for science education. In R. Cohen, C. A. Hooker, A. C. Michalos, & J. van Evra (Eds.), PSA 1974 (pp. 293-300). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
27. Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
28. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
29. Medawar, P. B. (1963). Is the scientific paper a fraud. The Listener, 70(12), 377-378.
30. Medawar, P. B. (1969). Induction and intuition in scientific thought. London: Routledge.
31. Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of science: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Ontario Council of Academic Vice Presidents (OCAV). (2008). Guidelines for university undergraduate degree level expectations. http://www.uwo.ca/ univsec/handbook/general/OCAV-Guidelines-2005.pdf. Last accessed May 16th, 2013.
33. Prather, C. M., Choate, D. M., Michel, M. J., & Crowl, T. A. (2009). Putting the "Ph" back into "PhD": framing graduate research in a theoretical context. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(7), 389-390.
34. Rosenberg, A. (2005). Philosophy of science a contemporary introduction (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
35. Salmon, M. H., Earman, J., Glymour, C., Lennox, J., Schaffner, K. F., Salmon, W. C., et al. (1999). Introduction to the philosophy of science: A text by members of the department of the history and philosophy of science of the University of Pittsburgh. Indianapolis, IN: Hacket Publishing Company.
36. Schickore, J. (2008). Doing science, writing science. Philosophy of Science, 75(3), 323-343.
37. Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2009). Responsible conduct of research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. Siegel, H. (1989). The rationality of science, critical thinking, and science education. Synthese, 80(1), 9-41.
39. Stigler, S. (2008). Fisher and the 5 % level. Chance, 21(4), 12.
40. Turner, S. (2001). What is the problem with experts? Social Studies of Science, 31(1), 123-149.
41. Varian, H. R. (1997). How to build an economic model in your spare time. The American Economist, 41, 3-10.